Opinions of females in a "male business"

[Winky]

She is Tank Girrl hear her roar!

 

[ResearchMonkey]

...Have you ever had man shave your legs for you before, it can be... well ....

 

[Inkara1]

The problem with this thread is that you automatically assume, (or set the tendency to assume) ...by stating in your own title, that the electronics business is a "male business"...

then go on by asking a question of what questionably feminist slanted nature, to a neanderthonlic, chauvinistic group of boneheads.

As they say, stupid questions deserve stupid answers.

Stupid. What did you expect?

I know what you mean and the main response to that is obviously not surprising. Thats because a lot of boneheads dominate this board, ESPECIALLY the RW and so the result is anythin but. Its a virtually-instituted state of far-right opinions with little or no tolerance for any alternative thought. Pity that huh? oh well...

If you intended the assumption that it is an industry dominated by men, then you should have put, 'male' dominated business.

But then then, thinking about it - to make you probably shouldn't have put 'male' in the title at all. stupid.

By now it should be clear that that the stereotypical assumption that men naturally know more than women as far as anything electronic is concerned is passe. Technology is a part of all of our lives and that sort of thing is accessable to everyone who wants to learn about it and get into it as much as brain surgery or anthropology, cooking or changing nappies. duh.

as long as you have the means, of course.

It is true that the only reason why a female (hired with the right foreknowledge in the first place as you would any employee) might know less or women as a whole are disproportionate in the industry is precisely because of the fact that the attitude that it is a "male business" in the first place. But then, if she is working there in the same position as the male then she is just as qualified as the male for the job and there is no reason why she shouldn't be treated in the same way. If a male was the head of that department or a specialist or more knowledgable about something then of course they might be the better option - but either way, so would a female if she were in the same position.

BTW as far as grammar is concerned, who really gives a damn - its the thought that is put into your writing that matters more than your attention to appeasing the tightarses that slam you down for every inaccuracy and typo.
As far as that is concerned, keep the ideas up - and don't let these anal grammar-nazi-repressive-wannabe-sadistic-highschool-english-teachers put you off posting...

That's an awfully wordy post for what amounts to four points:
1. This board consists entirely of narrow-minded neo-cons and stupid ones at that;
2. Kittie is dumb too for expecting an intelligent answer from anyone here;
3. Tank Girl would never make an assumption on someone's knowledge of electronics based on gender; and
4. Don't pay attention to the spelling/grammar "nazis" except, of course, that "male business" is phrased incorrectly.

 

[Winky]

This board consists entirely of narrow-minded neo-cons and stupid ones at that!

Pick me Pick me!!!

Good one Inkster!!!

 

[ResearchMonkey]

THIS board? ALL neocons? :roflapmp:

 

[tank girl]

That's an awfully wordy post for what amounts to four points:
1. This board consists entirely of narrow-minded neo-cons and stupid ones at that;
2. Kittie is dumb too for expecting an intelligent answer from anyone here;
3. Tank Girl would never make an assumption on someone's knowledge of electronics based on gender; and
4. Don't pay attention to the spelling/grammar "nazis" except, of course, that "male business" is phrased incorrectly.

ah my dear, Inky what would I do without your observant revelations.....

 

[Winky]

Go get em' Tanky!

 

[tank girl]

Driving Down Unknown Roads
The Feminization Of America
March 29, 2004
In the United States women are, I think for the first time in history, gaining real power. Often nations have had queens, heiresses, and female aristocrats. These do not amount to much. Today women occupy positions of genuine authority in fields that matter, as for example publishing, journalism, and academia. They control education through high school. Politicians scramble for their votes. They control the divorce courts and usually get their way with things that matter to them.
If this is not unprecedented, I do not know of the precedent. What will be the consequences?

Men have controlled the world through most of history so we know what they do: build things, break things, invent things, compete with each other fiercely and often pointlessly, and fight endless wars that seem to them justifiable at the time but that, seen from afar, are just what males do. The unanswered question is what women would, or will, do. How will their increasing influence reshape the polity?

Women and men want very different things and therefore very different worlds. Men want sex, freedom, and adventure; women want security, pleasantness, and someone to care about (or for)them. Both like power. Men use it to conquer their neighbors whether in business or war, women to impose security and pleasantness.

I do not suggest that the instinctive behavior of women is necessarily bad, nor that of men necessarily good. I do suggest that that the effects will be profound, probably irreversible, and not necessarily entirely to the liking of either sex. The question may be whether one fears most being conquered or being nicened to death.

Consider what is called the Nanny State by men, who feel smothered by it, but is accepted if not supported by women, who see it as protective and caring. (Yes, I know that there are exceptions and degrees in all of this, and no, I don’t have polling data.) Note that women are much more concerned than are men about health and well-being. Women worry about second-hand smoke, outlawing guns, lowering the allowable blood-alcohol levels for drivers, making little boys wear helmets while riding bicycles, and outlawing such forms of violence as dodge ball or the use of plastic ray guns. Much of this is demonstrably irrational, but that is the nature of instincts. (Neither is the male tendency to form armed bands and attack anyone within reach a pinnacle of reason.)

The implications of female influence for freedom, at least as men understand the word, are not good. Women will accept restrictions on their behavior if in doing so they feel more secure. They have less need of freedom, which is not particularly important in living a secure, orderly, routine, and comfortable life. They tend not to see political correctness as irritating, but as keeping people from saying unpleasant things.

The growing feminizaton accounts for much of the decline in the schools. The hostility to competition of any sort is an expression of the female desire for pleasantness; competition is a mild form of combat, by which men are attracted and women repelled. The emphasis on how children feel about each other instead of on what they learn is profoundly female (as for that matter is the associated fascination with psychotherapy). The drugging of male schoolchildren into passivity is the imposition of pleasantness by chemical means. Little boys are not nice, but fidgety wild men writ small who, bored out of their skulls, tend to rowdiness. They are also hard for the average woman to control and, since male teachers are absent, gelded, or terrified of litigious parents, expulsion and resort to the police fill the void. The oft-repeated suspension of boys for drawing soldiers or playing space war is, methinks, a quietly hysterical attempt to assuage formless insecurity.

The change in marriage and the deterioration of the family are likewise the results of the growth of political power of women. Whether this is good or bad remains to be seen, but it is assuredly happening. Divorce became common because women wanted to get out of unsatisfactory marriages. In divorce women usually want the children, and have the clout to get them. But someone has to feed the young. Thus the vindictive pursuit of divorced fathers who won’t or can’t pay child support. And thus the rise of the government as de facto father to provide welfare, tax breaks, daycare, and otherwise behave as a virtual husband.

When women entered a male workplace, they found that they didn’t much like it. Men told off-color jokes, looked at protuberant body parts, engaged in rough verbal sparring as a form of social interaction, and behaved in accord with rules that women didn’t and don’t understand. Women had the influence to change things, and did. Laws grew like kudzu to ban sexual harassment, whether real or imagined. Affirmative action, in addition to being a naked power grab, avoids competition and therefore making the losers feel bad. It degrades the performance of organizations, sometimes seriously, but performance is a preoccupation of males.

Men are capable of malignant government, whether authoritarian or totalitarian, as witness North Korea or the Russia of Stalin. I don’t know whether women would behave as badly if they had the power. (I’d guess not.) But women have their own totalitarian tendencies. They will if allowed impose a seamless tyranny of suffocating safety, social control, and political propriety. Men are happy for men to be men and women to be women; women want us all to be women.

The United States becomes daily more a woman’s world: comfortable, safe, with few outlets for a man’s desire for risk. The America of wild empty country, of guns and fishing and hunting, of physical labor and hot rods and schoolyard fights, has turned gradually into a land of shopping malls and sensible cars and bureaucracy. Risk is now mostly artificial and not very risky. There is skydiving and scuba and you can still find places to go fast on motorcycles, but it gets harder. Jobs increasingly require the feminine virtues of patience, accommodation to routine, and subordination of performance to civility. Just about everything that once defined masculinity is now denounced as “macho,” a hostile word embodying the female incomprehension of men.

A case can be made that a feminized world would (or will) be preferable to a masculine. Perhaps. It is males who bomb cities and shoot people in Seven-Elevens. Yet the experiment has not been made. I suspect we will have the worst of both worlds: a nation in which men at the top engage in the usual wars and, a step below, women impose inutterable boredom

oh no duck for cover...

that is one completely misconstrued example of a retarded stereotypical judgement from a masculine perspective of the femnist perspective ( of which, might I point out, are many which vary) and even starting to estimate it from that is at fault from the start.

 

[tank girl]

I'll tell you whut
without you we are condemned to discussions
of pizza and wristwatches

Go get em' Tanky!

So I noticed.

I just had to come back and save you all....

to be honest I just enjoy shit-stirring

 

[Winky]

We are SAVED!

 

[ResearchMonkey]

I love having you back too....

Another brainwreck, I can't help it, I have to look.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

I changed your pic

bummer...

Hey TG, how 'bout some more sultry pics to establish whether or not you're fat and hairy. *ohplease-ohplease-ohplease*

 

[Winky]

I second that 'request' there's always
PM or e-mail

 

[Inkara1]

ah my dear, Inky what would I do without your observant revelations.....

Next time you're going to say so little, say it in fewer words. Your keyboard will last longer.

 

[tank girl]

Next time you're going to say so little, say it in fewer words. Your keyboard will last longer.

What, and suppress my roar?

It is only a little because you selectively percieve it to be so.

 

[Winky]

She gets paid by the word, Ink.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

I thought she was tooling for free?

 

[Inkara1]

Ever listen to a lion roar? A roar usually doesn't last very long, and yet those few seconds sufficiently intimidate the rest of the animals of the jungle and savanna.

 

[tank girl]

I second that 'request' there's always
PM or e-mail

erm...thats all you're getting. And that was to dispel the uglee feminist myth, because that sort of thing really annoys me - for obvious reasons I'm not one.

That is a picture of me, yes.

Then I don't really take pride in flaunting my picture, I don't see anything attractive about it but the fact that I'm not a 'fat ugly hairy lesbian feminist...' as you might've preffered to think about me had I not posted it.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

but when a lion roars, theres usually ryme and reason to it.